I've read a bunch of analysis of this, and from what I can tell, the administration is legally required to defend DADT whether they want to or not, as it is currently law. That doesn't mean they'll try very hard ;-)

I wish they wouldn't defend it at all, but the sad fact is, they legally have to. The problem with them not doing that is that it sets a bad precedent for what an administration will try to get away with. The example I've seen given is the Bush administration failing to defend environmental laws they did not agree with. As much as I'd like Obama's DOJ to ignore this, it's a slippery slope that we can't go down. It would be like abolishing the filibuster; it works against us now, but it was very useful to have back when the Republikkklan party controlled the house, senate and white house.

What really needs to happen is that this has to go before the supreme court and be found unconstitutional. That's my hope.

Knowing that for the first time ever, the President is actually on our side is the one thing that I take comfort in. That, and the fact that demographics are favorable. Young people today mostly see equality for people of all orientations as obvious and natural. There will always be bullies, but their percentage of people who think it's ok to hate based on sexual orientation is lower than it's ever been.